A massive revelation in the alleged surveillance of President Trump’s aides broke Monday morning when Bloomberg reported that “[f]ormer National Security Adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign.” With their identities unmasked, it allowed for someone to freely and illegally leak their names to the press. It’s controversial news but ABC and NBC both chose to ignore it that night, while CBS defended Rice.

“We learned more today about the President's allegation that he and his aides were caught up in Obama-era surveillance,” CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley said, teeing up reporter Margaret Brennan. Strangely, Pelley stayed away from flinging the fiery insults which drew him much praise from the left. Instead of calling Trump’s claims “baseless,” he kept it neutral, only referring to them as “allegations.” He also described what the concern was as “Obama-era surveillance,” something he had not done in the past.

Brennan played defense for Rice, stating: “Well, Scott, as national security adviser to the president, Susan Rice could and did request the names of individuals who were picked up during legal surveillance of foreign nationals.” She then cited unnamed sources who told her there was nothing wrong with what Rice did:

Now, according to a former national security official, Trump associates were not the sole focus of Rice's request, but they may have been revealed when she asked to understand why they were appearing in intelligence reports. However, Rice did not spread the information according to this former official, who insisted that there was nothing improper or political involved.

On Fox News’s Special Report, it was a whole different story as they led the program with Rice’s unmasking efforts. “The surveillance of people close to President Trump, possibly the President himself, now has a name and a face attached to it. And it's one you've seen in major scandals before,” declared fill-in host James Rosen during the opening tease.

“Two weeks ago, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee announced to the press and President he had uncovered a disturbing trend of intelligence collection on Trump officials, some of which was made public,” reported Chief White House Correspondent John Roberts, “Today, we learn more about the ‘how’ and ‘who’ of what's going on.”

The Fox News reporter noted that when it came to statements from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes about Trump aides being swept up in incidental collection, Rice claimed she didn't know anything. “I know nothing about this. I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today,” she claimed on PBS NewsHour on March 22. That is now exposed as a lie, just like then she lied about what caused the Benghazi attack.

It's fascinating to see the way in which the name "Mike Cernovich" doesn't appear in any of these reports that I've seen. It's particularly interesting in light of the fact that Scott Pelley just broadcast a 60 Minutes report accusing Cerno of being "fake news"; one would think that this breaking new story would be at least somewhat relevant in this regard.

Much the same is true when Drudge breaks a story. The obvious conclusion is that the mainstream news organizations are determined to defend their perceived status, even if that means omitting where they got the story in the first place and pretending it was the result of their own reporting. Then again, they are the fake news.

This is entirely par for the course. It's the same thing as the way you'll see all the references to religion not causing war that are very careful to never mention either me or The Irrational Atheist. Even when the ideas are important and undeniable, even when the story cannot be ignored, they are determined not to credit the author for fear of elevating his profile. Of course, they do the exact opposite when they wish to raise someone's profile, such as a Malcolm Gladwell or a Richard Dawkins, and in such cases will actually credit them for merely popularizing someone else's ideas.

Mike tells Zerohedge how he got the story. Which happens to be the same way Drudge got the Lewinsky dress story:

"Maggie Haberman had it. She will not run any articles that are critical of the Obama administration. Eli Lake had it. He didn't want to run it and Bloomberg didn't want to run it because it vindicates Trump's claim that he had been spied upon. And Eli Lake is a 'never Trumper.' Bloomberg was a 'never Trump' publication."

"I'm showing you the politics of 'real journalism'. 'Real journalism' is that Bloomberg had it and the New York Times had it but they wouldn't run it because they don't want to run any stories that would make Obama look bad or that will vindicate Trump. They only want to run stories that make Trump look bad so that's why they sat on it."

"So where did I get the story? I didn't get it from the intelligence community. Everybody's trying to figure out where I got it from. I got it from somebody who works in one of those media companies. I have spies in every media organization. I got people in news rooms. I got it from a source within the news room who said 'Cernovich, they're sitting on this story, they're not going to run it, so you can run it'."

"If you're at Bloomberg, I have people in there. If you're at the New York Times, I have people in there. LA Times, Washington Post, you name it, I have my people in there. I got IT people in every major news room in this country. The IT people see every email so that's how I knew it."

Moral of the story: the Fake News sits on real news when it contradicts their Narrative.

108 Comments:

People see through this surface level stuff and can read between the lines just fine. The media's snubbing of Cerno if anything gives him more credibility. "If the media hates you then you must be one of the good guys" is the average person's thought.

@Vox: Given the way you have been treated; I doubt you expected anything else. Still, it is always entertaining to watch the establishment and its front organizations going through contortions that would impress a double jointed Yogi.

They are resentful of his success and circling the wagons. After all, Cernovich didn't go to journo school, didn't kiss the producer's ass for years or screw one of the executives, doesn't have to mouth platitudes or use Newspeak.

Society has formulated a path for the less intelligent, less capable, and less talented to use to succeed. These plodders naturally believe their crutch is a requirement and resent those who walk unassisted.

Cerno is doing some good work. Watched "Red Pill" last night and he is listed as an associate producer. Excellent and well done.

Mentioning Cernovich also, directly, means that the 60 Minutes attempted hit-piece wasn't just false, but that the people doing it are, themselves, "fake news". It's one thing to shoot yourself in the foot; it's wholly another to shoot the second right after.

Also, a really good insight into humans: almost no one is capable of disassociating themselves from their Income Source. Anything that threatens that is instinctively bad. They can see the problem that Cerno presents, though he's just the most recent version. The work they do isn't worth the pay. No one in Media is actually a "productive" member of society. At the basic, instinctual level, they know that and it comes through in their actions. This is beyond just wagon circling; it's primal fear starting to set in.

Plus, Trump lives Rent-free in their minds. Cernovich is trying to do the same thing as well.

Shimshon wrote:A Cernovich interview of Trump would be pretty cool right about now.

It would be, but Cernovich would look better in the long run if he didn't. Cernovich is already winning and he doesn't need the GE help to do it. It would make Cernovich appear stronger if he earned his place as a top notch news source without a favor from the GE.

The NYT can't help but mention how "Pro-Trump" the network is in the story. I don't watch Fox anymore and I am no fan of O'Reilly's but it seems convenient that these women were lined up and coordinated, and advertisers then acted immediately all within the span of a weekend. This reeks of being an SJW attack and likely for the reason stated as an aside. The perception that the network is "Pro-Trump".

Remember your Brothers Grimm! The two ugly do-nothing sisters and their MSM mother could only keep Cinderella under wraps for so long. Cernorella will have his deloraball and dance with the prince before long? Go Mike!

Regarding Cernovich if he were to interview Trump -- or not ... When diff you start being an advocate of the "honorable" way that doesn't lead to beating the left as opposed to just doing everything possible to win? This isn't National Review here -- stop clicking!

Regarding Cernovich if he were to interview Trump -- or not ... When diff you start being an advocate of the "honorable" way that doesn't lead to beating the left as opposed to just doing everything possible to win? This isn't National Review here -- stop clicking!

Not cucking and not talking about what is honorable. Talking about what makes your platform nice and stable. Standing on your own or with the support of peers gives you more autonomy than having someone give you a platform from on high. It's more about independence than about being honorable.

Anyone, at any level, would massively benefit from a presidential interview. It's retarded and indicative of a complete lack of media experience to even suggest that it would not be beneficial to anyone, from the lowest blogger to the most established media figure.

Just shut up. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. This is not the place to opine in ignorance.

I'm still encountering shock over the way the proprietors of these PUA-self improvement websites "blew up". One moment you are reading ROK's commentary on the best workout techniques and the next you are dividing your time between reading Krauthammer and Heartiste.

@23 I like Krauthammer's writing style. He has a way of taking a complex idea and conveying it in simple language. I like the way Heartiste uses descriptive (and nearly poetic) language to issue profound commentary.

Never, to my knowledge, has there been this big a disconnect between a legacy Narrative and pertinent information.

Just as the "News" seeks to eliminate CrimeThink by obfuscating the race, legal presence or national origin of one criminal after another (e.g., Somali women in MN listed as "housewives" who gave financial support to Al Shabaab terrorists) because we can't allow people to CONNECT THE DOTS, no one seems to notice that the difference between Watergate and Ricegate favors, in fact, Nixon.

Ayn Rand talked about the media's selective interpretation of events in her books Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead. It is deliberate psychological manipulation. They protect their own, while using "dynamic silence" to prevent their enemies the platform. It is on-going.

Journalism was born out of the pamphleteering that arose with the Gutenberg press and the Enlightenment. Pamphleteering was the main ingredient that destroyed Christendom. Pamphleteering morphed into "Journalism".

What this shows is the lack of virtue. One can't have a state without Virtue. The Virtue of Righteousness teaches that "to tell the truth even when interest is at stake". Virtue is a habit that must be incurred from youth. Where is that going on today? The four main virtues are Manliness, Righteousness, Prudence and Self-control (Temperance). Where is that being taught today? Nowhere. Without Virtue, no institution can do good.

Cernovich isn't reliable nor does he adhere to journalistic standards when it comes to sources, attribution. That the MSM is a mess doesn't relieve Mike of the burden to behave like a professional rather than mugging for the camera and babbling for 40 minutes about mostly nothing. Ya, ignoring Mike Cernovich is a sign that you have a functioning mind.

Shame is the opposite side of the coin of (justified) pride. An honorable man is too proud to keep the money in a found wallet. An honorable man would be deeply ashamed to take the property of another. An honorable man does what he discerns is right especially when no one is watching. An honorable man pays attention to his internal mirror, not the mirror in others' eyes.

We live in an age of unjustified pride ("everyone gets a trophy") and the utter absence of shame (which seems best characterized by the hook-up sex culture and complete denigration of life that is abortion-on-demand as a result.)

I predict shame will make a major comeback, but not before those who discarded it are dragged through crushing hardship, from which not all will emerge.

@32 Speaking only for myself, Cernovich has not only broken some of the biggest stories of the last year, he was at the forefront of exposing the depth of media corruption. Your critique has fallen on deaf ears. I dare say that you have a long way to go before being considered to have attained "Cassandra" status.

Glenn Donovan wrote:Cernovich isn't reliable nor does he adhere to journalistic standards when it comes to sources, attribution. That the MSM is a mess doesn't relieve Mike of the burden to behave like a professional rather than mugging for the camera and babbling for 40 minutes about mostly nothing. Ya, ignoring Mike Cernovich is a sign that you have a functioning mind.

You are not ignoring Cernovich. You couldn't ignore him at this point no matter how hard you try.

VD wrote:Anyone, at any level, would massively benefit from a presidential interview. It's retarded and indicative of a complete lack of media experience to even suggest that it would not be beneficial to anyone, from the lowest blogger to the most established media figure.

Admitting my ignorance, would you say it is better to get the eyeballs from an amenable authority whenever you can or is it better to wait and make sure you are prepared to capture a good percentage of them? I always thought the former explained people who hit big fame and then fizzled.

The opposition media thrives on the delusion it is still 1980. Its reach remains long but no longer is deep, so it is little surprise it will try to freeze out the New Mainstream Media. Non-attribution and all the old tricks can't save the Fake News monopoly.

It will be a treat to see the opposition media try to memory hole the Trump as Manchurian Candidate story touted for almost a year. It's not outside the realm they will run with the legitimate police state angle to divert attention from the opposition media's cluster on Russia. Pro tip: it won't work.

would you say it is better to get the eyeballs from an amenable authority whenever you can or is it better to wait and make sure you are prepared to capture a good percentage of them?

You cannot wait. The opportunity may never come again. Furthermore, a presidential interview is extremely special. There have only been a handful of them in the last 30 years. They are a massively big deal.

Doing one might well be sufficient to instantly establish the person doing it as a major media figure.

Just saw a Tweet from Richard Spencer serving up "haterade" in regards to Cernovich breaking the Rice story. Some of his followers gladly took their sips. What exactly is Spencer's point in all this? To me it appears that he is trying to ride the coattails of this story. He did the same thing in the Milo "pile on" that ensued a few weeks ago. He seems to have a rubric in these two instances: if its someone on your side who is punching (pun intended) your enemy, then find a way to tacitly side with that enemy.

The question is not one of what methods are used but whether the reporter tells the truth without omitting pertinent information such as context, competing factors, adverse factors. "Journalistic Standards" is nothing more than a fig leaf to hide behind ("We followed the protocol, summit!"), while deliberately getting the story wrong and misleading the audience.

Cernovich scoops the MSM and has not had to put out ANY retractions nor has the MSM who hate his guts been able to make any specific accusation of getting the story wrong, let alone misleading anyone, not even inadvertently.

I swear I've seen that exact comment before trying to slam Cerno. Wouldn't surprise me if the bots are in action. (And I think it was at T_D, but Spez has so cucked that search function I wouldn't find it.)

Cernovich probably had the Rice story before the 60 Minutes interview. He likely suckered 60 Minutes into their fake news narrative, and then busted their lies with a real news story they were suppressing. Classic and well executed ambush tactic.

It's almost like an old school professional wrestling story line. Knowing that he's going to be swerved because the opponent is a heel, baby face Cernovich instead swerves them (media heels). And now, he's gotten over huge with the crowd. A title shot is on the horizon.

"Now"? He's been visibly on the other side ever since Mr. Trump became GOP Candidate Trump. If it's bad for the neo-cons (regardless of party) and their goal of endless war in the Middle East, Jonah's against it.

I'm pretty convinced that Milo's invitation to appear on the Bill Maher show was all apart of the media's plan to discredit him later the same week. No point breaking a hit story on someone most Americans were unaware of.

Could Mike's sudden invitation to appear on '60 Minutes' be part of a similar plan to prime the public to believe he's a "purveyor of fake news" in advance of this story breaking?

I was hoping Mike would claim he got it from someone at 60 Minutes while they were interviewing him, so we could watch the rest of the MSM savage them. You know, for the LOLz. But saying it came from the media without naming names might be just as good.

@40 Dirty Rice isn't "political dirty tricks." It is quite literally an attempted coup de tat, a coordinated effort to undermine a legitimately elected president by a cabal of political opponents.

That people aren't being rounded up and perp-walked yet is evidence of just how profoundly divided is the country.

This is 1000 times more egregious than was Watergate, and imagine for a moment what it means that the Panopticon of the NSA/CIA/DIA "wiretapping" every single bit of communications in the USA (and world) is being openly used for political power.

IMO, this is the SMOKING CRATER of a hydrogen bomb that went off microseconds ago, and with each passing second, minute, hour, etc., we will see destruction and catastrophe spread in concentric rings around it.

This is the pivot point where the Federal Government's relevance has begun to decline, because its trustworthiness has now been utterly destroyed. Uncle Sam is openly revealed to be nothing but Organized Crime.

From the political use of the IRS to this, Obama's administration will go down in history as the most corrupt and criminal of all.

Oh, shucks, Cernovich could have triggered every single stinking Boomer by asking this question about Rice's unmasking request

What did President 0bama know of this, and when did he know it?

Remember, all the gatekeepers in every swamp stream media organization are Boomers. Every one of them. They signed up as journo-lists to be just like Woodward and Bernstein. Quoting the big line from Watergate would rub their collective noses in their own crap.

Well, the rest of us will just have to do it in our own way.

@12I only learned yesterday that Drudge was the one who broke the Lewinsky scandal after releasing a story about a MSM outlet sitting on a presidential scandal.

The press insisted Monica's blue dress didn't exist. There was a lot of doubling down on that. Drudge had evidence, waited his time, then ran it. That is what made his rep.

It's always the IT people! That electronic knife cuts both ways bitchez. And it just isn't possible for you to control that, at any level. From your local help desk, your NetAdmin, to your SysAdmin; all is visible and you'll never know who exactly is releasing your info. You are pwned!

Julian Assange has stated that his purpose in running Wikileaks is to force the organizations he leaks to internally calcify by forcing them to restrict their internal flow of information far more heavily. Once their information flow is so restricted, they will inevitably be less effective as organizations because this is their very internal communication lines he is forcing them to either sever or be willing to have open, and that can't help but hobble an organization.

Cernovich just pulled an Assange on the news media. Even if he didn't mention a specific organization's name, they've got to be wondering now. They're all very friendly with each other right now and I imagine thought they could straight-up sit on this story because I presume that in even the recent past, they could. If they didn't think they could just squash the story out of existence, the rational thing for them to do would have been to construct their spin and get the story + their spin out before anybody else could get a different spin out there first. (As powerful as spin can be after the fact it's still quite preferable not to be running behind as they now are.)

If I were Mike, I would be hinting to my sources that I would be quite amenable to receiving a dump of the contents of the Journolist 2.0, which the evidence all but proves has clearly reformed since Journolist 1.0 was found out and scattered. Once, as they say, is coincidence, but twice is enemy action. A second time would really go a long way towards proving to the journolists that you simply can't be this open, it will be found out. If it becomes dangerous and therefore difficult for the media to coordinate as much as they are right now it becomes much more difficult to create and maintain their lies. Not impossible, because the process will still work if it is done out in the open, but it will be harder, less effective, and perhaps most importantly given the speed with which the news cycles move now, slower. An Alt-Right that doesn't need that sort of coordination would have quite the advantage in the media at that point.

Assuming, of course, that he doesn't already have a mole on the Journolist 2.0.

In fact, I'd have to give decent odds to all of A: Mike does indeed already have some access to that (is perhaps the reason why he wasn't afraid to go on to 60 Minutes that he already knew their attack plan? I mean, not that the general shape isn't hard to guess, but did he know the specifics?) B: They're currently sitting on that access and gathering more stuff, because patience is a virtue and C: There is sufficient probably-illegal coordination evidenced on the list that if a full investigation of all the illegal Obama activity is done with the full force of the law, Journolist 2.0 will inevitably be discovered during some discovery or other. Given the impossibility of wiping out such wide-spread archives, especially in the light of the fact that a private archive would represent power on the part of the archiver to cut a deal in exchange for the archives, I would not be surprised we see some more Schumer-like evidence of some of the reporters becoming increasingly frantic and scared personally and lashing out even more wildly than they already are.

@70I was hoping Mike would claim he got it from someone at 60 Minutes while they were interviewing him, so we could watch the rest of the MSM savage them. You know, for the LOLz. But saying it came from the media without naming names might be just as good.

I was hoping he'd work up something Deep, and talk about a Throat, just to trigger all the Boomers.

But. "My spies are everywhere. In your newsroom. In your break room. In your IT department. They all come to me..." is good. It could be better, because it sows Doubt and Uncertainty.

Now every Boomer gatekeeper has Uncertainty about his noob reporters from J-school. Stinking Millennials, are they leaking to Cerno?

Now every Boomer gatekeeper has Doubts about his IT staff. Stinking nerds, are they leaking to Cerno?

Next comes fear. When the media boomer gatekeeper editors find out some of their staff might just be Deplorable.

Credit where it's due - hat tip to Cernovich. The problem, of course, is the MSM sitting or shitting on the story and the majority of normies never having heard of it.

I was a newly-minted Republican and conservative in the early nineties, and reading Heartiste yesterday made me realize how profoundly ignorant I was about Ruby Ridge. On the one hand, if Americans didn't rise up over that abomination of a government operation, one wonders if anything can motivate them. On the other hand, how many are as ignorant or more so than I was, due to the stranglehold of the MSM? If such a thing happened today, the Alt-Right and internet would be all over it. Still, while the stories are not comparable, how many normies today would have the faintest idea of the who LaVoy Finicum was?

@85I can't believe we've reached the point that major news stories are now being broken by infiltrating the Fake News.

Not quite correct. This major news story appears to have been broken by leaks from the Fake News. By insiders frustrated with their bosses going outside. Cracks in the walled garden of journo-lism. That is a good thing.

@85I can't believe we've reached the point that major news stories are now being broken by infiltrating the Fake News.

Not quite correct, this news story appears to have been broken by leakers inside the Fake News. Leaks from people no doubt frustrated by gatekeepers keeping the lid on. Deep Throat now operates out of a newsroom.

Watching how this has unfolded has been fascinating. The standard conservative press didn't report on it until Bloomberg published their story. Two aspects to this--first, Mike did this at night, and the con news didn't get going until business hours. Second, the con news mostly still isn't comfortable spreading a story until it's been "broken" by someone "respectable". To their credit, I've seen several folks update their later stories to include Mike (Breitbart), or the later folks include it from the start (Legal Insurrection.)

The interesting thing will be to see how the next big break plays out if it comes from a Cernovich or Ralph Retort or other Alt-News. We'll see if others wait for the news to be validated by the old outlets or if they just pick it up and run with it. It'll also be fun to see how nervous those old outlets will be now that they know they've got moles.

@91@88 No, my original statement was correct. The one who breaks a story is the one who publicizes it, not the source who chooses to remain anonymous.

So which of the infiltrators in Fake News broke the story?None. Cerno broke it, and he didn't infiltrate anything, he's right out there in the open.

Quibble all you want, the facts don't change. Fake News has leakers, who are willing to pass things on to alt News. This means that the aging Boomer gatekeepers will now be Uncertain and Doubtful, leading to getting busy with internal security witch hunts That's just fine with me.

@47 Al From Bay Shore Just saw a Tweet from Richard Spencer serving up "haterade" in regards to Cernovich breaking the Rice story. Some of his followers gladly took their sips. What exactly is Spencer's point in all this? ---

My favorite bit, as others have mentioned, is the part about the moles. Classic.

This will get these MSM outlets so busy chasing their own tails looking for phantom leaks everywhere, redoing all of their IT and security, and generally eroding all of their internal trust. It's tactics like this that will slowly etch away the facade of truth that they try so desperately to display to the world. Making it happen from within their own institutions as well as from without is just good doctrine to hasten along their demise.

The bit about Assange's real goal is interesting, I hadn't heard about that particular detail before.

It's like a digital information version of slowly destroying your enemies' mobility. On a battlefield -which is what this is- the immobile enemy is finished and can be destroyed at your leisure. Brilliant stuff.

"Now that this is coming out they'll say "look we had to, we were investigating Russian influence."

I wrote a post about a month, or more, ago basically asserting that the MSM manufactured the Russian Hacking narrative as cover for investigating Trump. This crap started with the Trump jokingly asking the Russians for Hitlery's missing emails in July last year (2016). There was a big uproar over it and then it faded into the background as election day got closer.

"If you're at Bloomberg, I have people in there. If you're at the New York Times, I have people in there. LA Times, Washington Post, you name it, I have my people in there. I got IT people in every major news room in this country."

This man is the new Sun Tzu. "Cernovichian" will replace "Machiavellian" in the dictionary in our lifetimes. Even if this statement isn't true, think of the mayhem it is causing in the MSM camp today... solid gold man, solid gold!

Not even close, as Mike is mainly a Civic Nationalist, he is great for his finger on the MSM, and understands some of what's necessary in the present. VD's Alt-West vision of where things are going is 3D, a touchstone to a new growing reality.

As stated before,I have a huge amount of respect for Mike, but this IS going in the direction of Identity Politics as forced by the Globalist/Leftists and the only solution to stop the "war of everyone against everyone", is a renewal of Christianity and Western Civilization.

The Globalists will be destroyed at any rate as everything breaks up to smaller and smaller crumbs, as all the minorities are already fighting for their power, and even that will break up into smaller and smaller groups. "Straight Outta Compton" is stupid irony, as the Blacks are currently getting genocided Straight Outta Compton by the Barrio Bros. Meanwhile, BLM is encroaching on femnazi territory in the universities. The Jews are getting pushed out by Muslims some places, and the Chinese in other... there will be no end to the backstabbing encroachments on each others power.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blogPlease do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.